UGA-2K-A vs. UGA-165 performance at same resolution.

I was interested in purchasing either the UGA-2K-A or UGA-165 VGA/DVI/HDMI adapter to drive a monitor with a resolution of 1680x1050. I understand that both of these adapters would support this resolution, but was wondering if I would notice any performance increase in going with the UGA-2K-A model. (I’m guessing that the real bottleneck would be the CPU and/or USB bus, but just wanted to make sure.)


Hi Matt,

Thanks for asking!

And the answer is very simple: at the same resolution, the performance will be exactly identical between the UGA-2K-A (which has a DislpayLink 195 chip in it) and the UGA-165 (which has a DisplayLink 165).

Now in contrast, the UGA-125 (which has a DisplayLink 125 chip) will have performance differences, as it has just a single decode engine (a single USB enpoint that rendering happens on).


With more details at…

Outside of which DisplayLink chip and driver version used, it’s actually hard for an adapter to have any significant effect on performance any direction.

As a user, the biggest effect you can have on performance is running at the lowest resolution that still looks great on your monitor (or, similarly, pick a monitor that’s physically large with less pixel resolution). Fewer pixels will mean less demand on the 480Mbps USB 2.0 bus.

So sometimes the UGA-125 actually has higher perceived performance, just because it has a lower max mode, and therefore has less pixels it has to compress with the CPU and move over USB.

Again, thanks for the question! Hope that explains the differences.